« PreviousContinue »
DEMONS SHOULD BE REVIVED AMONG CHRISTIANS. For I take the word Demon * not in that worst sense (which no Author but the Scripture useth) but in the better or more indifferent sense, as it was supposed and taken ainong the Theologists and Philosophers of the Gentiles, and as it is also sometimes taken in Scripture, as I shall shew in due time.
DEMONS (ACCORDING TO THE THEOLOGY OF THE GENTILES,)
WERE—1. FOR THEIR NATURE AND DEGREE, A MIDDLE SORT OF DIVINE POWERS BETWEEN THE SOVEREIGN GODS AND MORTAL MEN.-2. FOR THEIR OFFICE THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE MEDIATORS AND AGENTS BETWEEN THE CELESTIAL GODS AND MEN.—THIS PROVED FROM PLATO, PLUTARCH, APULEIUS, CELSUS, IN ORIGEN, AND S. AUSTIN. -THE DOCTRINE OF THE MEDIATION OF DEMONS GLANCED AT, AND REPROVED BY THE APOSTLES.-COLOSS. 11. 8.—THE DISTINCTION OF SOVEREIGN GODS AND DEMONS PROVED OUT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, AND ELEGANTLY ALLUDED TO IN
THE NEW-1 Cor. VIII. 5, 6. MEANWHILE, let us first see what the Gentiles and their theologists understood by Demons; which, when you have heard, I doubt not but you will confess, the deifying and worshipping of Saints and Angels, with other parts of the idolatry of those who do this, to be as lively an image of the doctrine of Demons as could possibly be expressed ; and such an one, that by it the apostasy of the latter times is, as by a character, distinguished from the heresies, false doctrines, and corruptions of all other times whatsoever.
Demons, in the Gentiles' theology, were (Deastri),
or an inferior sort of deified powers,* as a middle between the sovereign Gods and mortal men. So says Plato, (in Symposio ;) so say all the Platonists, and well nigh all other sects of philosophers.
I am sure the most do; for it is a very ancient doctrine, insomuch that Plutarch + fetcheth this distinction between sovereign Gods and demons, as far as the antiquity of Zoroaster. I "They seem to me" (saith he)" to havesolved great and difficult doubts, who have placed the demons between the gods and men, and found out what, in some sort, uniteth and joineth us with them. Whether this be the doctrine of the Magi and Zoroaster, or the Thracian doctrine derived from Orpheus, or the Egyptian, or Phrygian, &c." The sovereign or highest Gods, (which, amongst them, were properly called Gods, s were those whom they supposed to be in the heavens, yea, in the sun, moon, and stars, whence they called them “high Gods, celestial Gods,"|| whom they affirmed to have neither beginning nor ending ; thus Apuleius, in his treatise concerning the demon of Socrates, calls them “immortal without any end or beginning, and altogether eternal."** And because they dwelt in the heavenly lights, as it were souls in bodies, Plato thinks that the name Theoi (Gods) first came from the verb Theo, which signifies to run, in consequence of the everlasting running and incessant motion of the heavenly bodies. ++
* Παν το Δαιμονιον μεταξυ εστι Θεου τε και θνητου.
+ De defectu oraculorum 1 Εμοι δε δοκoυσι πλειονας λυσαι και μειζονας αποριας οι το Δαιμονων γενος εν μεσω Θεων και ανθρωπων, και τροπον τινα την κοινωνιαν ημων συναγoν εις ταυτο και συναπτον εξευροντες" ειτε μαγων τωντε περι Ζωροαιρην ο λογος ουτος εσιν, ειτε Θρακιος απ' Ορφεως, ειτε Αιγοπτιος, η φρυγιος, &c.
|| Dii superii, Dii cælestes. ** Immortales sip; nllo vel fine vel exordio, sed prorsus a retio æviterni.
+ Plat. in Cratylo.
Now, these sovereign and celestial Gods they supposed 80 sublime and pure, as might not be profaned with approach of earthly things, or with the care and managing of mortal men's business; and, therefore, they bring in that middle sort of divine powers which they call* demons, to be as mediators and agents between the sovereign Gods and mortal men. Thus, saith Plato, in his Symposium.f. “God is not approached by men, but all commerce and intercourse between Gods and men is performed by the mediations of demons.” Do you wish to to see in what particular? I “ Demons” (saith he) "are reporters and carriers from men to the Gods, and again from the Gods to men, of the supplications and prayers of the one, and of the injunctions and rewards of devntion from the other." And Apuleius in the place forequoted describes them thus :- $«• Demons are middle powers, by whom both our desires and merits pass unto the Gods; they are carriers between men on earth, and the Gods in heaven-from hence of prayers, from thence of gifts ; they bring to and fro, hence petitions, thence supplies; or they are certain interpreters on both sides, and conveyers of recommendations." • For," saith he,ll "it beseems not the majesty of the sovereign Gods to manage these things of themselves.” Whence it is that Celsus in Origen terms his demons:-**" The Peers, Presidents, Lieutenants, and
* Δαίμονες or Δαιμόνια. + Θεος ανθρωπω ου μιγνυται, αλλα δια Δαιμονιων πασα εσιν η ομιλια και η διαλεκτος Θεους προς ανθρωπους.
1 Το Δαιμονιον εσιν ερμηνευον και διαπορθμευον Θεoις το παρ' ανθρωπων, και ανθρωπους τα παρα Θεων, των μεν τας δεησεις και θυσιας, τωνδε τας επιταξεις και αμοιβας των θυσιών.
s Mediæ potestates, per quas et desideria nostra et merita ad Deos commeant; inter terricolas cælicolasque vectores, hinc precum, inde donorum, qui ultro citroque portant, hinc petitiones, inde suppetias, seu quidem utrinque interpretes et salutigeri.
ll Neque enim pro majestate Deûm coelestium fuerit hæc curare.
** Σατραπας του επι πασι Θεου, και υπαρκους, και στραinyous XOI ETT UTPOTOUS.-Or. Contra Cels. Lib. riii,
Officers of the Most High God, who, being neglected, can do as much hurt as the Peers and Officers of the Persian or Roman Kings.” Where note, by the way, that Celsus, as some others, did acknowledge but one sovereign God.
By reason of this office of mediation, Plutarch (in his De defect. Orac.) calls the order of demons, agreeably to the doctrines of Plato,* “the natures which interpret and minister," also“ attendants, recorders, overseers of sacred rites and mysteries." To stay no longer here, take the sum of all in the words of Apuleius, in the book forenamed :-“ All things are done by the will, power, and authority of the celestial Gods; but withal by the service and ministry of the demons.“ f I should bring all that I might to this purpose, I should be too tedious. Porphyrius in Eusebius, and Plutarch, skilful inen in this
kind of philosophy, will satisfy them fully to whom this is not sufficient.
This was the philosophy that was universal in the Apostles'times, and the times long before them. Thales, Pythagoras, all the academicks and stoicks, and not many to be excepted, unless the Epicureans, taught this divinity. He that had rather read a Father of the Church, let him but turn over the eighth and ninth books of St. Austin De Civ. Dei, the eighteenth chapter of the former book, having this title: "What a religion is it that teacheth men to use good demons for their advocates to commend them to the Gods ?" The one-and-twentieth chapter this :- Whether the Gods do use demons for their messengers and interpreters." And of the ninth chapter of the ninth book, the title is this :||—“Whether the friend
* Την ερμηνευτικης και διακονικης φυσιν. Also υπηρετας, και γραμματεις, επισκοπους ιερων και μυστηρίων.
+ Cuncta cælestium poluntate, numine et authoritate fiunt, sed Dæmonum obsequio, opera et niinisterio.
Qualis sit religio in qua docetur quò homines, ut commendentur Diis, bonis Domonibus uti debeant advocatis.
Š An Dæmonibus nuntiis et interpetribus utantur.
11 An amicitia cælestium Deorum per intercessionem Dæmonum possit homini provideri.
ship and favour of the celestial Gods may be procured for men by the intercession of demons.” And of the seventeenth chapter, this :-*"To the attaining of blessedness, man hath no need of a demon for his mediator, but of Christ alone.” The reading of which titles alone were sufficient to shew what was the supposed office of the demons among the Gentiles.
This philsophy, therefore, so general, was that, without doubt, whereof St. Paul admonisheth the Colossians, to také heed, lest they were spoiled with the vain deceit thereof, as being after the traditions of men, and rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For some Christians, even then, under a pretence of humility, of not approaching too nearly and too boldly to God, would have brought in the worshipping of angels instead of this of demons. But St. Paul tells them, that “as in Christ dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” he needed no colleagues of mediation : so also “ were they complete in him," and needed, therefore, no agents besides him. “Let no man, therefore," (saith he) “ beguile you of your reward through humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, and not holding the head, &c."
Neither is the holy Scripture ignorant of this distinction of sovereign Gods and demons. The first whereof, the celestial and sovereign Gods, whether visible or invisible, it calls Saba hashamayim, the host of heaven. The other sort it styleth by the name of Baalim, that is, Domini, or Lords. And Manasseh, that king of idolators, was complete for both of them. So we read, 2 Chron, xxxiii. 3, that“ he reared up altars for Baalim, and made groves, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served them.” And, 2 Kings, xxiii. 5, that good Josiah is said to have “ put down the idolatrous Priests which burnt incense to Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.” And, 2
* Ad consequendam vitam beatam non tali mediatore indigere hominem qualis est Dæmon, sed tali qualis est unus Christus.